I-mon wrote:Michael have you ever been to a protest? There are often a lot of students and community groups involved, who have often had working bees where they get together and make banners and signs or costumes etc, and then on the day random people are often recruited to hold one side of a banner or wave a flag or something. It would be completely ordinary for someone to ask someone else to hold a banner, and given that a lot of the people involved are only loosely affiliated with any recognised political groups or movements (and often have only a vague understanding of any of the issues involved) it also wouldn't be unusual at all for people to be holding things they haven't written themselves, they may not have fully read because they're paying attention to all of the other stuff that's going on, or they might just be along for the ride.

You seem to think that the people at these sorts of protests are highly organised groups with coherent beliefs that they all share when the opposite is more likely true.

Never been to a protest and think I'll never be. That above description sound as protest are quite disorganized, why would anyone want to participate in such a spectacle more than once...crazy

By the way, thank you for the warning about such happenings, big disorganized crowds are not fun to be near

If that's how you see it, fine, but I've brought up other points that I think are valid, which Steve and I went through for a while.

The banner is definitely not a fake in the photoshop sense that that pic you posted is an obvious fake or more just political satire. The banner was real according to the social worker from Columbia who was the organizer for Antifa at that event. It wasn't a photoshop.

"So it's not whether Antifa has it on their site, because they were filmed holding the sign at one of their protests, they need to disavow it to be against it. Otherwise, they're for it."

But they weren't holding the sign,right? So I'm not sure what your point is? They have to apologise for something they didn't do? They really need to say they don't support child abuse because someone tried to make it look like they did? If I fake a post under your name saying you like to kill puppies with a hammer, do you have to tell us you don't once everyone knows it is a fake post?

No, Antifa was actually holding the very large banner that required three people to stretch out to read it. That is admitted by the Antifa organizer as I said to you, as I said to Steve, and as I linked in the Gothamist article I posted, which was written by the left-leaning journalist who took the viral picture of them holding the banner.

Antifa was holding the banner sign. It was them holding the actual sign, which obligates them to address the content of the sign and explain their claim that they were hoaxed, if that's the case.

"Gothamist reporter Jake Offenhartz, who actually took the picture that Cernovich tweeted, mentioned in his original tweet that the sign was an “alt-right” plant. (Twitter apparently took down the photo in Cernovich’s tweet for infringing Offenhartz’s copyright.) An organizer of the protest later told Offenhartz that someone gave the sign to the protesters who held it for a short moment before they realized what it said and ran off the miscreant. Different reporters on Twitter agreed with Offenhartz’s skepticism regarding the authenticity of the sign"

"Writer Jake Offenhartz was covering the protests for the New York City blog Gothamist when at least one masked man moved to the front of the crowd with a large banner that read:“No white supremacy, no pedo bashing, no Mike Cernovich,” over a slew of logos including one that read “New York City Antifa” and another that read “NAMBLA.”At least two people at the Columbia event “unveiled the banner and handed it to a couple of people who held it without really of looking at it,” before disappearing into the crowd Offenhartz told The Daily Beast."

Of course it's clear. And the claim is a deliberate lie that will be passed along without question. Ithe illustrates that the source is unreliable and must be checked before being believed. There have been several of these type of faked or misrepresented images or stories. If you Google fake Antifa, you'll find articles claiming the Texas shooter belonged to Antifa.

"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."

Antifa was protesting and wanted to be seen and heard by as many as possible with their signs, slogans, etc. Do you think they are obligated to respond to basic questions about the content of the sign they were holding, even if it was not theirs?

Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:You are so ridiculous in your incredibly misguided crusade that direct responses are not even warranted. You have proven over and over again either an inability to communicate honestly or, more likely, an intentionally duplicitous nature, which is why a back and forth is just a waste of time. You are a troll waging a war against social justice. Just think about that. You find anti-fascists more reprehensible than fascists. In typical Alt-Right fashion, you pretend to be reasonable, but can't think or argue rationally, find reliable sources, vet information, or be honest in your goals and motivation. You are as bad as the Alt-Right stooges who planted the sign.

I think that you and Steve are the are the ones who are being intentionally duplicitous.

Last edited by chud on Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Lies are lies. Defending thugs is another thing. This thread wasn't about anybody getting beaten up. It was about the truth of a statement and the motives behind it. Which is generally to legitimize anyone Antifa protests against. I think they're silly young average Americans who are as misguided in their methods as the Weather Underground and Jerry Rubinstein, Abby Hoffman followers.

Anyway I have little respect for Nazi and KKK supporters, or for those who accept their support. It's a free country for now.

"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."

I-mon wrote:Michael have you ever been to a protest? There are often a lot of students and community groups involved, who have often had working bees where they get together and make banners and signs or costumes etc, and then on the day random people are often recruited to hold one side of a banner or wave a flag or something. It would be completely ordinary for someone to ask someone else to hold a banner, and given that a lot of the people involved are only loosely affiliated with any recognised political groups or movements (and often have only a vague understanding of any of the issues involved) it also wouldn't be unusual at all for people to be holding things they haven't written themselves, they may not have fully read because they're paying attention to all of the other stuff that's going on, or they might just be along for the ride.

You seem to think that the people at these sorts of protests are highly organised groups with coherent beliefs that they all share when the opposite is more likely true.

Never been to a protest and think I'll never be. That above description sound as protest are quite disorganized, why would anyone want to participate in such a spectacle more than once...crazy

I guess there are all sorts of protests, and people generally show up because they care about the issues. For a lot of young folks, students etc, and all sorts of other people it might just be to see what all the fuss is about, or to "be part of something", or any number of reasons. That's why they're often disorganised, because when it comes down to it it's still a bunch of random people.

Hi Michael, no elaboration required on my side, I just wanted clarification of your statement that antifa were "against pedo-bashing". You hadn't (then) said you were against any bashing so it implied you might be for pedo bashing.